Bombing Our Bastard

This little effort has maintained on several occasions that the experiences of the past 15 years have shown that it is not the job of the United States to “impose democracy” on less civilised nations. Particularly then, when the less civilised nations are, well, prevalently Muslim and therefore unlikely to behave in a civilised manner unless some strong ruler keeps the Muslim mob in check.

I have, therefore, always praised Trump’s change of policy compared to Gay Mulatto concerning Syria. If you ask me, our card in the region is the Government, not any group of Islamic present or future fundamentalist (note to the reader: whenever a Muslim government is in power, sooner or later fanatic Islamists seize control of it. Therefore, the allegedly “moderate” Muslims of today are the troublemakers of tomorrow).

However, this does not mean that Assad can do whatever he wants. He must understand that his freedom to be a bastard is limited to internal matters of his. No one expects him to be a retiring wallflower, but it is clear that if he resorts to a) genocide or b) chemical weapons then this is something that cannot be tolerated. The only remaining superpower has the means, and I would add a moral duty, to act on this whenever reasonably feasible.

It is, therefore, not true that Trump has changed his policy on Syria. Firstly, because he hasn’t (the American Government has still chosen Assad’s government to retake control of Syria and put an end to the war). Secondly, because a new situation required an appropriate reaction.

Notice the intelligence of the guy: 1) He shows Assad that the fact that the POTUS wants his regime to survive does not mean he is free to do what he wants; 2) He kicks him in the balls, but does not cut his regime’s throat; 3) He clearly indicates that Assad’s regime will be helped to win the conflict, but Assad himself will have to make place – before or after dying – to a more reliable bastard; 4) He looks good. Yep, he just looks damn good in front of the entire Western world after 8 years of LGBT presidential effeminacy; 5) He gives a kick in the backside to all those Libtards who maintain he is in bed with Putin. And yes, let them say this is all a ruse. They will look even more lunatic than they do already. 6) Dulcis in fundo, he sends a very strong signal to Iran, China and North Korea: there is a new sheriff in town, and woe to the one who think he can mess with him.

If I were a US taxpayer I would not want my money and the life of US soldiers to be wasted on useless attempts to teach Muslims to avoid massacring each other, which is and will remain their favourite sport. But I would still want this money and those lives to be used to avoid genocides and use of weapons of mass destruction, and – not a bit less important – to be used to have reliable bastards in power in all places that counts. Ubi honor, ibi onus.

Lastly, the matter of Assad’s responsibility. I do not buy the theory of the faked attack, or of the plot to oust Assad himself. I trust Trump and the US intelligence enough not to be fooled, and to act only when they are reasonably sure of what has happened. It would be counterproductive for Trump if it became known that he was deceived. Please give him some credit, the man has shown already that he is very smart. I also have a certain allergy for conspiracy theories. Conspiracy theories are the best way to persuade oneself of the contrary of what reality shows.

The simplest explanation is the most credible: Assad became cocky once reasonably sure of the US support, and thought that he could afford the attack and strengthen his position inside the regime (you will have noticed that in the Arab culture the more ruthless you are, the more you are respected).

Assad is not fit to stay in power, is all. My pint goes on his side eventually winning the conflict with Russian and American help, and on Assad being removed, or killed, at some point during or soon after the end of it.

We need useful bastards to run Muslim Countries. But they must know when the West will draw a line in the sand.

Sons of dictators, who inherited power, are rarely as smart as their fathers who took it.

Mundabor thank you! I must say I’ve been disheartened by the reactions of the conservatives towards Trumps actions. Unlike Obama and Hillary Trump is not advocating a change of leadership in Syria. He is simply keeping this Assad in line and letting him know what happens when the line is crossed. Bravo Trump

Agreed, Mr. M! A little fraternal correction was in order here. Even though we do have a common enemy in ISIS, the US cannot be allied with a government who targets civilians, many of them children, with chemical weapons. No doubt Assad thought he could do so with impunity because he is backed by the Russian government. Our bombing of the jets which transported the chemicals (with minimum military casualties) was necessary to warn Assad against gassing his own citizens again. So in that respect, we have saved innocent lives. I support President Trump for taking action. This action doesn’t mean we are preparing to engage in another Middle Eastern war, which is how some people interpret it. The president understands the impact of limited strategic airstrikes. He’s a tough guy, but his moral compass points in the right direction. I’m still thanking God for his election.

1) He shows Assad that the fact that the POTUS wants his regime to survive does not mean he is free to do what he wants; 2) He kicks him in the balls, but does not cut his regime’s throat; 3) He clearly indicates that Assad’s regime will be helped to win the conflict,

I don’t like what I see. Assad handled his chemical weapons to the Russians (in a process supervised by the US) back in 2013. Assad has nothing to win, and everything to lose, by using such weapons (his situation is far from desperate now, thanks to Russian help). The pictures of the attack are at least suspicious: White Helmets (a “humanitarian” NGO affiliate with Al Qaeda) rescues survivers not using gloves, when sarin is extremely toxic with contact. Everything points to two possiblities:
1- Assad bombed a rebel depot which stored some kind of chemical weapons (like chlorine, much less toxic than sarin. We know that the Ghouta attack back in 2013 was made by the rebels with chemical weapons handled to them by the Turks);
2- everything was staged.
US intelligence is not to be trusted, except for very few individuals (like the ousted Michael Flynn), almost all of them are full agents of the NWO.
So now Trump is saying that Assad “has crossed many lines”, Tillerson confirmed that steps to remove Assad “are in place”, and Nikki Halley says in the UN that Russia should be held responsible too. It seems that Trump failed to drain the swamp, and is changing sides.

It seems to me that Trump had more robust information than your unverified suspicions. The symptoms of the victims point to the use of Sarin. Sarin burns when bombed , and is a two-component substance that cannot go of unless it’s elements are mixed at the moment of use. The Russians would have no interest in staging such action and watch as they lose.

Everything points to Assad being a ruthless bastard eager to consolidate his power, show he is the tough guy and scare the hell out of his enemies.

Exactly. And sarin is extremely toxic when touched, so how come our White Helmets friends are touching the victims with their bare hands? Have a look at pictures of a real sarin attack (the 1995 attack on the Tokyo metro), and you will see rescuers fully covered in chemical-protective suits.
I fully agree with two guys’ analysis, both of whom supported Trump. One is a military/geopolitical analyst who goes by the name of “The Saker”:http://www.unz.com/tsaker/the-trump-administration-goes-neocon-crazy/
The other is Paul Joseph Watson from “InfoWars”:
Even if you don’t agree, it is worth reading/watching what they have to say. Both are strongly conservative and had hopes on Trump. I do agree and am myself very disappointed, and seeing the comments here I am not the only one.

I do not improvise myself a Sarin expert. I also never knew a sarin victim cannot be touched hours later. Actually they can and they do, as happened in Tokio.
The brand of conservatism you suggest is the wrong kind. It is an isolationist mentality that refuses to accept responsibility for the role as suporpower. I do not know the first site, I found “Infowars” brilliant at times, but over the top on many occasions.

I think Trump has made his first serious error. The chemical attack was without doubt not Assad’s work but is being instrumentalised for political ends. Assad, being a member of a minority group himself, is a noted protector of Christians and has gained their support as a result. Whenever the US has gone into middle east conflicts the results have been an increase in the support for Jihadis and salafism. Let’s hope that Russia can persuade Trump to stay his hand in Syria.

No.
He would have to be an Arab.
Saddam invaded Kuwait in 1990 with the same kind of bold move that looks stupid only when the other side wants to see the bluff.

Come, Pray The Rosary!

Fra Filippo Lippi, "Madonna delle Rocce", particular

Daily Offering to the Immaculate Heart of Mary

The Francis Papers

Why This Blog

Pope Pius XII in Prayer

Five Million Pageviews

Non Praevalebunt

“What Catholics Once were…”

"What Catholics once were, we are. If we are wrong, then Catholics through the ages have been wrong.
We are what you once were. We believe what you once believed.
We worship as you once worshipped. If we are wrong now, you were wrong then. If you were right then, we are right now".

Mundabor’s Blog

Pope XII: “Suicide Of Altering the Faith In Her Liturgy…..”

"I am worried by the Blessed Virgin's messages to Lucy of Fatima. This persistence of Mary about the dangers which menace the Church is a divine warning against the suicide of altering the Faith, in Her liturgy, Her theology and Her soul. … I hear all around me innovators who wish to dismantle the Sacred Chapel, destroy the universal flame of the Church, reject Her ornaments and make Her feel remorse for Her historical past.
"A day will come when the civilized world will deny its God, when the Church will doubt as Peter doubted. She will be tempted to believe that man has become God. In our churches, Christians will search in vain for the red lamp where God awaits them. Like Mary Magdalene, weeping before the empty tomb, they will ask, 'Where have they taken Him?'"

Eugenio Pacelli, future Pius XII.

Roche, "Pie XII Devant L'Historie", p. 52-53

G.K. Chesterton: Malice & Spite

"If a critic tells a particular lie, that particular lie can be pointed out. If he misses a specific point, that point can be explained. If he is really wrong in this or that, it will be on this or that that the insulted person will eagerly pounce. But “malice and spite” are vague words which will never be used except when there is really nothing to pounce on. If a man says that I am a dwarf, I can invite him to measure me. If he says I am a cannibal, I can invite him to dinner. If he says I am a coward, I can hit him. If he says I am a miser, I can give him half-a-sovereign. But if he says I am fat and lazy (which is true), the best I can answer is that he speaks out of malice and spite. Whenever we see that phrase, we may be almost certain that somebody has told the truth about somebody else."
The Illustrated London News, 13 November 1909.

G.K. Chesterton: Dogma & Authority

The modern world will accept no dogmas upon any authority; but it will accept any dogmas on no authority. Say that a thing is so, according to the Pope or the Bible, and it will be dismissed as a superstition without examination. But preface your remark merely with “they say” or “don’t you know that?” or try (and fail) to remember the name of some professor mentioned in some newspaper; and the keen rationalism of the modern mind will accept every word you say.

G.K. Chesterton: Progress & Fashion

The world is what the saints and the prophets saw it was; it is not merely getting better or merely getting worse; there is one thing that the world does; it wobbles. Left to itself, it does not get anywhere; though if helped by real reformers of the right religion and philosophy, it may get better in many respects, and sometimes for considerable periods. But in itself it is not a progress; it is not even a process; it is the fashion of this world that passeth away. Life in itself is not a ladder; it is a see-saw.

G.K. Chesterton: Tradition

“Tradition means giving votes to the most obscure of all classes, our ancestors. It is the democracy of the dead. Tradition refuses to submit to the small and arrogant oligarchy of those who merely happen to be walking about.”

Ronald Reagan & The Unborn Children

"NOW THEREFORE, I, RONALD REAGAN, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim and declare the unalienable Personhood of every American, from the moment of conception until natural death, and I do proclaim, ordain, and declare that I will take care that the Constitution and laws of the United States are faithfully executed for the protection of America's unborn children. Upon this act, sincerely believed to be an act of justice, warranted by the Constitution, I invoke the considerate judgment of mankind and the gracious favor of Almighty God. I also proclaim Sunday, January 17, 1988, as a national Sanctity of Human Life Day. I call upon the citizens of this blessed land to gather on that day in their homes and places of worship to give thanks for the gift of life they enjoy and to reaffirm their commitment to the dignity of every human being and sanctity of every human life".

George W. Bush & Those Waiting To Be Born

“All human life is a gift from our creator that is sacred, unique and worthy of protection. On National Sanctity of Human Life Day, our country recognizes that each person, including every person waiting to be born, has a special place and purpose in this world”. [...]

“The most basic duty of government is to protect the life of the innocent. [...]

“The sanctity of life is written in the hearts of all men and women. On this day and throughout the year, we aspire to build a society in which every child is welcome in life and protected in law. We also encourage more of our fellow Americans to join our just and noble cause. History tells us that with a cause rooted in our deepest principles and appealing to the best instincts of our citizens, we will prevail.”

George W. Bush
Presidential proclamation of "National Sanctity of Human Life Day", January 18, 2009